Chinese Economics Thread
- Thread starter Norfolk
- Start date
broadsword
Brigadier
Their beef with the port was the lack of transparency and sovereignty. If there was a lack of transparency, the new govt can follow up the trail. 'Sovereignty' is for them to deal with its interpretation, after all they have the final say.
What is undeniable is the economic multiplier benefits to Sri Lanka from the initial $1.5b outlay, which they would have a hard time supplanting. Unlike others, it is never China's policy to interfere in the internal politics of other countries, so Sri Lanka can confidently cozy up to other countries than China.
shen
Senior Member
Clyde Prestowitz is an interesting guy. Seems like an old fashion isolationist who transcend the left/right labels. Another article by him.
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
solarz
Brigadier
This article is interesting because it is reveals the kind of wishful thinking and narrow vision that led to the Afghanistan and Iraqi debacles in the first place. The assumption in the article is that Afghanistan must be subdued with force of arms, and that China wants to take up where the US left off because only then would they be considered a world power.
Both assumptions are ludicrous, of course, but they show that certain people have learned nothing from these 15 years of quagmire.
broadsword
Brigadier
I think China is invaluable to the Talibans because not only is it a neighbor, it already has big investments in the mineral industry and can help in the reconstruction of the country. Most importantly, it does not try to exert its influence on who gets ruling power in other countries. So it is more trustworthy than Western countries.
Equation
Lieutenant General
Why would the US to illegal trade practices by China less than 24 hours after the two countries’ presidents shared a rare phone call to discuss their nations’ relations?
That timing, and the relatively small size of the subsidies in question—$1 billion over three years—suggests that the US bringing this case before the World Trade Organization is largely intended to send a message to a domestic audience: We’re tough on trade violations, and you can count on us to enforce the rules.
That’s an important message for president Barack Obama to get across, as he pushes for a free trade pact for 18 countries around the Pacific rim. Lawmakers from both parties are skeptical of both the negotiating process and whether new rules will mean increased prosperity. For the Obama administration, the Trans-Pacific Partnership is a key way to lock in a global rule-set that protects the US led-economic order as China attempts to craft its own Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership:
Economists tend to argue that free trade boosts growth, but the creative destruction associated with such changes has led to fewer middle-income jobs in the US and other advanced economies, while the benefits. Labor-friendly politicians on the left Obama’s opponents on the right in an attempt to scuttle legislation that would give the president a free hand to negotiate the pact, considered a virtual pre-condition of reaching a deal.
Many opponents want the pact to include provisions to punish currency manipulation, a non-starter with the administration. And compromises on issues related to public health, intellectual property, labor and environmental rules all seem far away. Negotiating drafts are largely kept secret from the public, raising lawmakers’ ire, particularly when straying from the White House’s public promises.
In its challenge to illegal trade practices by China, the US says that “common service platforms” funded by the Chinese government provided $1 billion in free services over three years to “demonstration base” production facilities that accounted for 12% of Chinese textile exports and 20% of Chinese aquaculture exports in 2012. However, the details of this arrangement remain unclear, and may not differ significantly from the Obama administration’s own $1 billion investment across the US.
If the Obama’s aim is to reassure lawmakers who oppose the free-trade pact, it’s unclear how effective the maneuver, which elides their fundamental concerns, will be.A number of lawmakers with constituents who compete against subsidized Chinese exports spoke out in support of the administration’s challenge, but only one of them, California’s Scott Peters, is who oppose giving Obama the authority to fast-track a trade deal.